Antenor

Antenor v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
174 Cal. App. 3d 477·1985 Cal. App. LEXIS 2758·220 Cal. Rptr. 181
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 18, 1985B007195California2,544 words

Opinion

Opinion

Riley, J.

On February 12, 1979, at approximately 6:20 p.m., pedestrians/plaintiffs Erlinda Mercado Antenor and her husband, Abraham Reyes Antenor, (plaintiffs) were struck in an unmarked crosswalk by a westbound 1979 Buick, as they were crossing Third Street, south to north, on the westerly side of the Grammercy Place intersection.

On November 30, 1979, plaintiffs filed a personal injury damage suit against the City of Los Angeles (the City) alleging that the City was maintaining a dangerous condition of public property.

At the conclusion of the evidence, the trial court granted the City’s motion for a directed verdict. Plaintiffs have appealed.

Appellant’s Contention

Plaintiffs/appellants contend that the lack of pedestrian and/or traffic control, inadequate lighting, high traffic volume and the “geometries” of Third Street at the intersection combined to create a “dangerous condition.” It is further their contention that the existence of a “dangerous condition” is a factual question for the jury and not one to be determined by the court on a motion for a nonsuit.

Discussion

Preliminarily, it is necessary to detail the physical characteristics of the intersection in question…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.